T9400 v P8600 in studio xps 16

Is there a big difference between the 2 not in games and in games(RTS games)?

T9400 - 2.53ghz, 6mb cache, 1066mhz bus
P8600- 2.4ghz, 3mb cache, 1066ghz bus

 

no real diff unless heavy cpu intensive. like cad, number crunching, simulations.

 

The thing is the way alot of RTS games are programmed they do run better with a faster cpu. In modern RTS games its not the graphics that slow you down the most its the physics involved with calculating more and more units moving in different directions. Add to that terrain affecting shooting and movement, and all the back processes going on.

This is why you see a huge slow down during the end game in many RTS games there are just to many unit physics going on at once.

 

yeh, but will double cache and .13ghz really big a difference even in rts games?

 

Nope not really. The large cache maybe a little bit. I think I missread the cpu types you had written about, thought there was a bigger difference.

 

i was just thinking because i have the chance to give me new laptop back and get a refurb outlet one wit a T9400 but for £100 less ($140?).

i was just thinking if i should do that if it doesnt make much of a dif anyway.

i cba with givin my laptop back, waiting for the money to come through, waiting for a decent outlet laptop to be on the outlet (stock changes) and end up with a refurb.

 

I'd much rather have twice the cache than the .13Mhz speed advantage. If you hit a cache miss and the CPU has to wait for the memory, all the processor speed wouldn't help.

 

whats a cache miss and does double cache do anything
even under stress, as far a i can tell from google, cachhe makes no diff.

so im not going to bother and .13ghz when its going to make hot heat and make the battery suck even more in a laptop with heat and battery problems.
T9400 uses 35W and P8600 uses 25W, studio xps has a 90W supple so 10W is a big difference.

 

Why is it that Intel chose to lower the cache in a more powerful processor? For example the T7500 that was in my M1530 had a 4 meg cache but the P8600 that I have now only has a 3 meg cache.

 

A cache is onboard memory on the CPU itself. It stores recently requested data -- if the new data requested is not in the cache memory, it's called a cache miss and it means that the CPU must go out to the much slower external memory (your 4GB, or whatever) to get the data.

In a memory intensive application more cache can certainly make a big difference. It really all depends how the application is written.

 

In addition, remember it is 0.13 GHz per core. That said it is important to take the lower power consumption on the P8600 into account. There are quite a few people asking the same question using Google XD.

 

I don't think you will notice the slightest difference in game's and 95% of other thing's.

A link to an experiment I did with my notebook comparing gaming performance between the P8600 and X9100.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=370643